THINGS YOU MIGHT NOT THINK HEADING INTO 2009 (1 Viewer)

[sinatravolta]

There are many people who appear to be thinking that Brady will lead the league in fantasy points over this period as I see him as the first QB off the board in many recent dynasty drafts.....Why else would these irrational people select him as the first QB off the board if they didn't believe he would score the most ff points over the next few seasons? Maybe they expect him to score the most ff points this season, would that be your answer?.......

Seriously? People might take Brady as the first QB because they think he's the MOST LIKELY QUARTERBACK to lead the league in FP over the next 3 seasons. That doesn't mean they're taking Brady because they think the MOST LIKELY SCENARIO is that he leads the league in FP over the next 3 seasons. Don't see the distinction? Let me break it down for you.Let's say that I believe there's a 20% chance that Brady leads the league in FP over the next three season. Say I put Manning's odds at 18%, Brees at 15%, Rivers at 12%, Cutler and Rodgers each at 10%, Roethlisberger and Warner each at 5%, and estimate a 5% chance that someone else (Eli Manning, Matt Ryan, Trent Edwards, even Tarvaris Jackson) manages to pull off the feat.Now, in that hypothetical situation, Brady is clearly ranked as the #1 QB on my board, and Manning is equally clearly the #2 guy. There's no way I'd take Jay Cutler over either, for instance. Still, despite the fact that I think Brady and Manning are the two most likely QBs to lead the league in fantasy points, I think it's almost twice as likely that someone other than those two will actually wind up pulling it off. Basically, you're saying that it's more likely that Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler, Ben Roethlisberger, Kurt Warner, Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub, Mark Sanchez, Matt Stafford, Matt Leinart, Vince Young, Kerry Collins, Kyle Orton, Joe Flacco, Sage Rosenfels, or any other QB in the entire NFL (and even QBs who haven't even made it to the NFL yet) will lead the league in fantasy points. That's not a bold prediction- all you need is for one out of hundreds of NFL players to beat Brady and Manning. Two injuries are all it would take to guarantee you a win, while it would take over a hundred injuries to guarantee you a loss. If you narrowed the list down to 2 or 3 names, then it would be a bold or counter-intuitive prediction, but as it stands? Any rational human being, if they were at Vegas being given even odds on whether Brady/Manning or "the field" would lead the league in FPs over the next three years, would put their money on "the field".Now, if you don't want to post your picks to lead the league over that span, that's your prerogative, I'm simply saying that your projection, as written, would be better served in a thread titled "things you almost certainly think heading into 2009".By the way, this whole phenomenon (that an individual entity can be the MOST LIKELY to accomplish a feat yet still not be LIKELY to accomplish the feat) is the same thing that allows me to say that I have the Steelers ranked as the #1 team in my power rankings, yet still think they won't win the superbowl.

The first QB I take off the board, if all QBs are still available on the board, is the guy I believe has the best chance to score the most points over the next few years. Yes, I BELIEVE this, otherwise, I take someone else. Who cares about percentages, odds, or whatever of it actually happening and whether it is unlikely or likely, you, I, or anyone else is taking the QB we'd believe is giving the most reward (points)....Simple Dude, please take something for this condition of yours. You're overanalyzing the simplest of things. I'm not going to keep going in circles with you, luckily, I've got extra time on my hands of late but geeeeeez, you take things a bit too literal. You feeling alright?.....

DUDE, he's not crazy, you are just being stubborn or dense - I can't tell which. He gave you an EXCELLENT explanation of why your "prediction" is not "out of the box" or anything that your thread title implies. He was trying to help you and he was being very respectful doing it. YOU are the one who needs to lighten up and MAYBE actually read what he is saying.

Yeah - I agree. I thought your list was interesting/good. But as I read through the Brady/Manning one I thought the same thing as SSOG - that this initially looks like a bolder prediction than it actually is. Now - maybe this is a reminder to people that a lot is unpredictable over time and things change - so they shouldn't feel too certain about Brady and Manning - but if so - that's a fairly limited comment/prediction. Unless you want to say something like Rodgers/Rivers will put up basically the same numbers as Brady/Manning over the next 3 years - you're not saying anything that has much impact on how people draft. It's like saying someone other than Adrian Peterson or MJD will put up the most fantasy points for an RB over the next few years. In most of these cases - taking the field is the much better bet.

 

[kremenull]

There are many people who appear to be thinking that Brady will lead the league in fantasy points over this period as I see him as the first QB off the board in many recent dynasty drafts.....Why else would these irrational people select him as the first QB off the board if they didn't believe he would score the most ff points over the next few seasons? Maybe they expect him to score the most ff points this season, would that be your answer?.......

Seriously? People might take Brady as the first QB because they think he's the MOST LIKELY QUARTERBACK to lead the league in FP over the next 3 seasons. That doesn't mean they're taking Brady because they think the MOST LIKELY SCENARIO is that he leads the league in FP over the next 3 seasons. Don't see the distinction? Let me break it down for you.Let's say that I believe there's a 20% chance that Brady leads the league in FP over the next three season. Say I put Manning's odds at 18%, Brees at 15%, Rivers at 12%, Cutler and Rodgers each at 10%, Roethlisberger and Warner each at 5%, and estimate a 5% chance that someone else (Eli Manning, Matt Ryan, Trent Edwards, even Tarvaris Jackson) manages to pull off the feat.Now, in that hypothetical situation, Brady is clearly ranked as the #1 QB on my board, and Manning is equally clearly the #2 guy. There's no way I'd take Jay Cutler over either, for instance. Still, despite the fact that I think Brady and Manning are the two most likely QBs to lead the league in fantasy points, I think it's almost twice as likely that someone other than those two will actually wind up pulling it off. Basically, you're saying that it's more likely that Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler, Ben Roethlisberger, Kurt Warner, Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub, Mark Sanchez, Matt Stafford, Matt Leinart, Vince Young, Kerry Collins, Kyle Orton, Joe Flacco, Sage Rosenfels, or any other QB in the entire NFL (and even QBs who haven't even made it to the NFL yet) will lead the league in fantasy points. That's not a bold prediction- all you need is for one out of hundreds of NFL players to beat Brady and Manning. Two injuries are all it would take to guarantee you a win, while it would take over a hundred injuries to guarantee you a loss. If you narrowed the list down to 2 or 3 names, then it would be a bold or counter-intuitive prediction, but as it stands? Any rational human being, if they were at Vegas being given even odds on whether Brady/Manning or "the field" would lead the league in FPs over the next three years, would put their money on "the field".Now, if you don't want to post your picks to lead the league over that span, that's your prerogative, I'm simply saying that your projection, as written, would be better served in a thread titled "things you almost certainly think heading into 2009".By the way, this whole phenomenon (that an individual entity can be the MOST LIKELY to accomplish a feat yet still not be LIKELY to accomplish the feat) is the same thing that allows me to say that I have the Steelers ranked as the #1 team in my power rankings, yet still think they won't win the superbowl.

The first QB I take off the board, if all QBs are still available on the board, is the guy I believe has the best chance to score the most points over the next few years. Yes, I BELIEVE this, otherwise, I take someone else. Who cares about percentages, odds, or whatever of it actually happening and whether it is unlikely or likely, you, I, or anyone else is taking the QB we'd believe is giving the most reward (points)....Simple Dude, please take something for this condition of yours. You're overanalyzing the simplest of things. I'm not going to keep going in circles with you, luckily, I've got extra time on my hands of late but geeeeeez, you take things a bit too literal. You feeling alright?.....

DUDE, he's not crazy, you are just being stubborn or dense - I can't tell which. He gave you an EXCELLENT explanation of why your "prediction" is not "out of the box" or anything that your thread title implies. He was trying to help you and he was being very respectful doing it. YOU are the one who needs to lighten up and MAYBE actually read what he is saying.

Dude, the whole thing was moot, to me. I explained my position as well VERY CLEARLY, so if it was my original post, then why not just allow me to do it how I choose to do it. I told him that I intentionally put that prediction out in that manner, and the guy continued to try to give me suggestions on how I should have phrased it. I don't need an adviser to tell me how to post something. It is not implied that I was making some BOLD predictions by the title of my thread, that would be someone's assumption. It's simply THINGS YOU MIGHT NOT THINK. That doesn't equate to BOLD, IMO. In this particular example, it equates to Tom Brady being picked as the consensus 1st QB in drafts and me saying I don't believe he will be the guy to finish first over the next 3-4 years. Simple, agree or disagree, it doesn't matter and it's not a problem. But if they don't like it, then don't worry about it, start a thread and make your own assertions, no need to tell others how they should state, or word stuff, in their threads.

 

[kremenull]

Im curious why you have Ward, Thomas, and Smith on your list of soon to be busts on #2.

With Ward, I'm simply not a believer and he is certainly not a marquee talent for whom I would not question. I think he benefitted tremendously from the situation in New York: 1) a very good defense there that gave plenty of opportunities to the offense, 2) a strong RBBC that provided ample opportunities for the RBs involved to get quality carries and stay fresh throughout the year, 3) the presence of Brandon Jacobs in said RBBC, as he wore down defenses to make it easier for others (like Ward), and 4) an excellent o-line who had major continuity as a unit and a proven track record of success in the running game; and I don't believe the situation will be as good in T.B. Add that he is 29, and I just haven't seen enough from him throughout his career to all of a sudden believe that at 29, he is now the real deal. Too many younger, more talented backs on the horizon to reserve a spot for guys like this.Thomas is also a beneficiary palyer - he is on a team loaded with talent surrounding him. A decent back, yes, but guys like this aren't really at the same talent level of the supporting cast and are often upgraded. Many overlook the fact that the Saints held very few draft picks in the '09 draft, especially in the first few rounds. Could this be the reason they didn't bring in a young, high draft selection at the RB position? Of these players on the list though, Thomas probably has as good of a chance of remaining a starter as any other, IMO. Smith just simply reminds me of Addai. I don't see anything that he is special at, and people like to compare him to Forte, but no, he's not Forte. Forte runs excellent patterns, for one, and this should not be understated, as he can line up out wide as a WR, and actually catch passes and not just be a decoy (even fades, which are rare for RBs at this level). Also, Forte is much better in pass pro than Smith, again, I saw both of them last year and Smith was atrocious in pass pro, Forte was pretty good and very willing, at least. When you are not a supertalented runner, then your game better not have many holes in it as you will be upgraded as well. I'll use a guy like Larry Johnson as an example. This guy was not a good route runner and receiver out of the backfield, decent receiver but not good route runner, and is horrible in pass pro. But boy is he a special runner. So, he kept his job in spite of his faults in other areas, sure, they eventually catch up to you and you start to come out a little more on passing downs and such, but the Chiefs never looked to upgrade him. Well, Smith is not Larry Johnson.I'm not saying that these guys will all bust, per se, but I believe they are not marquee talents and their franchises could very well look to upgrade them sooner rather than later.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

There are many people who appear to be thinking that Brady will lead the league in fantasy points over this period as I see him as the first QB off the board in many recent dynasty drafts.....Why else would these irrational people select him as the first QB off the board if they didn't believe he would score the most ff points over the next few seasons? Maybe they expect him to score the most ff points this season, would that be your answer?.......

Seriously? People might take Brady as the first QB because they think he's the MOST LIKELY QUARTERBACK to lead the league in FP over the next 3 seasons. That doesn't mean they're taking Brady because they think the MOST LIKELY SCENARIO is that he leads the league in FP over the next 3 seasons. Don't see the distinction? Let me break it down for you.Let's say that I believe there's a 20% chance that Brady leads the league in FP over the next three season. Say I put Manning's odds at 18%, Brees at 15%, Rivers at 12%, Cutler and Rodgers each at 10%, Roethlisberger and Warner each at 5%, and estimate a 5% chance that someone else (Eli Manning, Matt Ryan, Trent Edwards, even Tarvaris Jackson) manages to pull off the feat.Now, in that hypothetical situation, Brady is clearly ranked as the #1 QB on my board, and Manning is equally clearly the #2 guy. There's no way I'd take Jay Cutler over either, for instance. Still, despite the fact that I think Brady and Manning are the two most likely QBs to lead the league in fantasy points, I think it's almost twice as likely that someone other than those two will actually wind up pulling it off. Basically, you're saying that it's more likely that Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler, Ben Roethlisberger, Kurt Warner, Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub, Mark Sanchez, Matt Stafford, Matt Leinart, Vince Young, Kerry Collins, Kyle Orton, Joe Flacco, Sage Rosenfels, or any other QB in the entire NFL (and even QBs who haven't even made it to the NFL yet) will lead the league in fantasy points. That's not a bold prediction- all you need is for one out of hundreds of NFL players to beat Brady and Manning. Two injuries are all it would take to guarantee you a win, while it would take over a hundred injuries to guarantee you a loss. If you narrowed the list down to 2 or 3 names, then it would be a bold or counter-intuitive prediction, but as it stands? Any rational human being, if they were at Vegas being given even odds on whether Brady/Manning or "the field" would lead the league in FPs over the next three years, would put their money on "the field".Now, if you don't want to post your picks to lead the league over that span, that's your prerogative, I'm simply saying that your projection, as written, would be better served in a thread titled "things you almost certainly think heading into 2009".By the way, this whole phenomenon (that an individual entity can be the MOST LIKELY to accomplish a feat yet still not be LIKELY to accomplish the feat) is the same thing that allows me to say that I have the Steelers ranked as the #1 team in my power rankings, yet still think they won't win the superbowl.

The first QB I take off the board, if all QBs are still available on the board, is the guy I believe has the best chance to score the most points over the next few years. Yes, I BELIEVE this, otherwise, I take someone else. Who cares about percentages, odds, or whatever of it actually happening and whether it is unlikely or likely, you, I, or anyone else is taking the QB we'd believe is giving the most reward (points)....Simple Dude, please take something for this condition of yours. You're overanalyzing the simplest of things. I'm not going to keep going in circles with you, luckily, I've got extra time on my hands of late but geeeeeez, you take things a bit too literal. You feeling alright?.....

DUDE, he's not crazy, you are just being stubborn or dense - I can't tell which. He gave you an EXCELLENT explanation of why your "prediction" is not "out of the box" or anything that your thread title implies. He was trying to help you and he was being very respectful doing it. YOU are the one who needs to lighten up and MAYBE actually read what he is saying.

Dude, the whole thing was moot, to me. I explained my position as well VERY CLEARLY, so if it was my original post, then why not just allow me to do it how I choose to do it. I told him that I intentionally put that prediction out in that manner, and the guy continued to try to give me suggestions on how I should have phrased it. I don't need an adviser to tell me how to post something. It is not implied that I was making some BOLD predictions by the title of my thread, that would be someone's assumption. It's simply THINGS YOU MIGHT NOT THINK. That doesn't equate to BOLD, IMO. In this particular example, it equates to Tom Brady being picked as the consensus 1st QB in drafts and me saying I don't believe he will be the guy to finish first over the next 3-4 years. Simple, agree or disagree, it doesn't matter and it's not a problem. But if they don't like it, then don't worry about it, start a thread and make your own assertions, no need to tell others how they should state, or word stuff, in their threads.

If your intention with that statement was to make the case for something that most reasonable people are likely to ALREADY think (which does seem to conflict with "THINGS YOU MIGHT NOT THINK") - mission accomplished. I don't really believe that's what you were going for (since most of the other statements seem to be things that the general public really doesn't tend to go along with), but if it was, great.The thing is, I don't even care about how you phrased something on your list. I probably wouldn't have bothered commenting on it at all by itself. I just think you came off as completely juvenile while attacking a guy who had a very reasonable comment on one of your statements (which several of us have already agreed with). You presented a fairly interesting list of things to discuss. Congratulations. The next step is to be prepared for and reasonably handle comments from other members of the community.

 

[kremenull]

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours.

I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills.

People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football.



DONE....

Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please.

Thank You!

 

[Instinctive]

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours. I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills. People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football. DONE....Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please. Thank You!

Dude...it isn't that people don't like how you put it out there, its just that you implied it was a bold prediction when, in fact, it is not bold at all. And before you go off on me too, I'm nobody's buddy here, just a friendly neighborhood spell/fact checker. In this case, they are correct in saying it isn't a bold prediction at all. I think the point is that you shouldn't claim it as such.And I agree with it. I also agree with Pryor>Tebow. So far Pryor has barely scraped the tip of the iceberg. He's accurate, he's strong, he's fast, he has an arm cannon...Going to be a beast someday.Now on the RBs: Most of those I would agree with, but I think you're wrong on Smith, and here's why:He has been the leading rusher in the NCAA, something you don't do by being average in everything and great at nothing. IIRC, he holds the NCAA record for single season rushes, so he's quite durable. He also holds the record for straight rushes without a fumble in a season, spending that entire record year without fumbling the ball. (450 carries) So you know he can protect it well.His record season for points scored is 4th all time, so you know he finds the endzone. His single season rushing best was only 62 yards shy of Barry Sanders's record.I think his durability, high ypc, balance of power, and ability to catch out of the backfield (72% catches on 54 targets last season) could lead him to have many monster FF seasons if Detroit climbs out of the cellar of the league. Which has been done before, and owuldn't be that difficult if a couple young defense guys step up and Stafford is good.ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

 

[SSOG]

The first QB I take off the board, if all QBs are still available on the board, is the guy I believe has the best chance to score the most points over the next few years. Yes, I BELIEVE this, otherwise, I take someone else. Who cares about percentages, odds, or whatever of it actually happening and whether it is unlikely or likely, you, I, or anyone else is taking the QB we'd believe is giving the most reward (points)....Simple Dude, please take something for this condition of yours. You're overanalyzing the simplest of things. I'm not going to keep going in circles with you, luckily, I've got extra time on my hands of late but geeeeeez, you take things a bit too literal. You feeling alright?.....

We aren't going around in circles, I'm banging my head against a brick wall. I'm not nitpicking, you're just making an incredibly high-percentage prediction and calling it something that "most people wouldn't think".If you go to Las Vegas, the odds are always better that a player or team will *NOT* win something than they are that they'll win, even if the player or team is the odds-on-favorite to win. So, basically, when you say that Brady/Manning will *NOT* lead the league in FPs, you're making a very safe high-percentage prediction. It's not going out on a limb, it's firmly hugging the trunk and holding on for dear life. It's a weak prediction. Your other predictions were actually things that people might not think, but that one doesn't really qualify. Why not add a prediction that at least three of the top ten RBs during the draft won't finish the season in the top 10 while you're at it?

Dude, the whole thing was moot, to me. I explained my position as well VERY CLEARLY, so if it was my original post, then why not just allow me to do it how I choose to do it. I told him that I intentionally put that prediction out in that manner, and the guy continued to try to give me suggestions on how I should have phrased it. I don't need an adviser to tell me how to post something. It is not implied that I was making some BOLD predictions by the title of my thread, that would be someone's assumption. It's simply THINGS YOU MIGHT NOT THINK. That doesn't equate to BOLD, IMO. In this particular example, it equates to Tom Brady being picked as the consensus 1st QB in drafts and me saying I don't believe he will be the guy to finish first over the next 3-4 years. Simple, agree or disagree, it doesn't matter and it's not a problem. But if they don't like it, then don't worry about it, start a thread and make your own assertions, no need to tell others how they should state, or word stuff, in their threads.

I wasn't telling you how to phrase your opinion, I was just saying that, as currently phrased, it does not qualify as a projection that people MIGHT NOT THINK HEADING INTO 2009 (CAPS CAPS CAPS).P.S. When you post something entirely in caps, it equates to bold.

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours. I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills. People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football. DONE....Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please. Thank You!

First, Schneike's not my "buddy". Obviously we've seen each other around quite a bit since we've both around and active for a while, but I can't think of a single instance where I've directly interacted with him (i.e. quoted a post or had him quote one of mine). Given our tenures and levels of activity it's bound to have happened at some point, but I don't recall it, and I doubt he does, either. Implying that he's only on my side because we're bosom buddies and BFFs is just short-sighted. If he's on "my side" it's because he agrees with my position, not because he's fond of me.Second, I don't think it's an exaggeration of facts to call "Dude, please take something for this condition of yours." an attack, (although, for the record, I didn't take it as such).Third, I don't know how it's "petty and juvenile" to point out that a prediction you made is incredibly likely to be correct and not at all uncommon thinking. I think it's more juvenile to expect every post to be in awe at how risky your predictions are, or to assume that everyone is trying to pump you for just a taste of your super-secret knowledge that far surpasses our own. I can tell you right now that I don't care the slightest little bit about which QB you have ranked as your #1 QB in dynasty leagues. It's not like your opinion would have the slightest impact on how I rate or value QBs in my dynasty league.Fourth, when you make a thread full of predictions, then you can't later tell people they weren't involved when they offer an opinion on one of those projections. As soon as you decided to post these projections up in the public domain, everyone with access to them became "involved".

 

[gonzobill5]

ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

until I read this I thought I had the phrase wrong all these years.

 

[mdog1967]

Here are just a few tidbits of the things that I'm predicting as the 2009 season is closely approaching. These are not casual thoughts/opinions, they are formed positions and stances that I'm willing to ride with based on what I've gathered after considerable evaluation.....1. Steve Slaton will outperform Chris Johnson over the next 3-4 years.....yes, so this does apply to dynasty. I have Slaton rated above Chris Johnson, ever so slightly, and believe that it will be close, but final production will tilt in the favor of Slaton over the next few years, beginning in '09. 2. At least 75% of these RBs will be replaced by the end of 2010 as the lead dog on their respective NFL teams. They will either bust, decline sharply, or be overtaken by better talent......Ryan Grant, Marion Barber, Joseph Addai, Derrick Ward, Clinton Portis, Willie Parker, Cedric Benson, Brian Westbrook, Pierre Thomas, Larry Johnson, LaDanian Tomlinson, and Kevin Smith3. The #1 Fantasy QB over the next 3-4 seasons will not be Tom Brady or Peyton Manning4. QBs like Pat White, Mike Vick, Tim Tebow, and the "Chosen One" will quite possibly change the game as we see it today, or should I say "revolutionize" the position of QB, at least modify and/or expand the current traditional QB role over the next few years.And last but not least, I've analyzed both players and thought about it quite long enough to go ahead and make the call ahead of the curve, 5. Josh Morgan > Michael Crabtree.Yes, the period means period....Redraft, dynasty, whatever. Morgan will simply be a better player. Attitude, work ethic, and internal makeup will be factors here. And by all means, please stay asleep on the kid's talent......I'm not referring to draft pick #10

1. Disagree. Slaton is good but not near as talented or quick.2. Obvious post, no revelation here. By 2010 probably 50% of the starting RB's today will be replaced.3. Its called picking the field, its like betting that some one other than Tiger Woods will win any given tournament.4. No, Vick should have signaled to the league that you cant make up for lack of accuracy and the ability to read a defense with superior athletic ability. I'll take a good offensive line and a smart accurate passer over any you mentioned.5. Crabtree could learn a lot from Morgan, on this you may have something. I think you agree with about half of FBG's who have already stated the same thing. Hey its 50/50.

 

[mbuehner]

4. QBs like Pat White, Mike Vick, Tim Tebow, and the "Chosen One" will quite possibly change the game as we see it today, or should I say "revolutionize" the position of QB, at least modify and/or expand the current traditional QB role over the next few years.

Still waiting for Warren Moon, Rodney Pete, and Jeff George to revolution the game via the run-and-shoot.

 

[gianmarco]

The first QB I take off the board, if all QBs are still available on the board, is the guy I believe has the best chance to score the most points over the next few years. Yes, I BELIEVE this, otherwise, I take someone else. Who cares about percentages, odds, or whatever of it actually happening and whether it is unlikely or likely, you, I, or anyone else is taking the QB we'd believe is giving the most reward (points)....Simple Dude, please take something for this condition of yours. You're overanalyzing the simplest of things. I'm not going to keep going in circles with you, luckily, I've got extra time on my hands of late but geeeeeez, you take things a bit too literal. You feeling alright?.....

We aren't going around in circles, I'm banging my head against a brick wall. I'm not nitpicking, you're just making an incredibly high-percentage prediction and calling it something that "most people wouldn't think".If you go to Las Vegas, the odds are always better that a player or team will *NOT* win something than they are that they'll win, even if the player or team is the odds-on-favorite to win. So, basically, when you say that Brady/Manning will *NOT* lead the league in FPs, you're making a very safe high-percentage prediction. It's not going out on a limb, it's firmly hugging the trunk and holding on for dear life. It's a weak prediction. Your other predictions were actually things that people might not think, but that one doesn't really qualify. Why not add a prediction that at least three of the top ten RBs during the draft won't finish the season in the top 10 while you're at it?

Dude, the whole thing was moot, to me. I explained my position as well VERY CLEARLY, so if it was my original post, then why not just allow me to do it how I choose to do it. I told him that I intentionally put that prediction out in that manner, and the guy continued to try to give me suggestions on how I should have phrased it. I don't need an adviser to tell me how to post something. It is not implied that I was making some BOLD predictions by the title of my thread, that would be someone's assumption. It's simply THINGS YOU MIGHT NOT THINK. That doesn't equate to BOLD, IMO. In this particular example, it equates to Tom Brady being picked as the consensus 1st QB in drafts and me saying I don't believe he will be the guy to finish first over the next 3-4 years. Simple, agree or disagree, it doesn't matter and it's not a problem. But if they don't like it, then don't worry about it, start a thread and make your own assertions, no need to tell others how they should state, or word stuff, in their threads.

I wasn't telling you how to phrase your opinion, I was just saying that, as currently phrased, it does not qualify as a projection that people MIGHT NOT THINK HEADING INTO 2009 (CAPS CAPS CAPS).P.S. When you post something entirely in caps, it equates to bold.

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours. I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills. People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football. DONE....Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please. Thank You!

First, Schneike's not my "buddy". Obviously we've seen each other around quite a bit since we've both around and active for a while, but I can't think of a single instance where I've directly interacted with him (i.e. quoted a post or had him quote one of mine). Given our tenures and levels of activity it's bound to have happened at some point, but I don't recall it, and I doubt he does, either. Implying that he's only on my side because we're bosom buddies and BFFs is just short-sighted. If he's on "my side" it's because he agrees with my position, not because he's fond of me.Second, I don't think it's an exaggeration of facts to call "Dude, please take something for this condition of yours." an attack, (although, for the record, I didn't take it as such).Third, I don't know how it's "petty and juvenile" to point out that a prediction you made is incredibly likely to be correct and not at all uncommon thinking. I think it's more juvenile to expect every post to be in awe at how risky your predictions are, or to assume that everyone is trying to pump you for just a taste of your super-secret knowledge that far surpasses our own. I can tell you right now that I don't care the slightest little bit about which QB you have ranked as your #1 QB in dynasty leagues. It's not like your opinion would have the slightest impact on how I rate or value QBs in my dynasty league.Fourth, when you make a thread full of predictions, then you can't later tell people they weren't involved when they offer an opinion on one of those projections. As soon as you decided to post these projections up in the public domain, everyone with access to them became "involved".

Yet again.

 

[Instinctive]

The first QB I take off the board, if all QBs are still available on the board, is the guy I believe has the best chance to score the most points over the next few years. Yes, I BELIEVE this, otherwise, I take someone else. Who cares about percentages, odds, or whatever of it actually happening and whether it is unlikely or likely, you, I, or anyone else is taking the QB we'd believe is giving the most reward (points)....Simple Dude, please take something for this condition of yours. You're overanalyzing the simplest of things. I'm not going to keep going in circles with you, luckily, I've got extra time on my hands of late but geeeeeez, you take things a bit too literal. You feeling alright?.....

We aren't going around in circles, I'm banging my head against a brick wall. I'm not nitpicking, you're just making an incredibly high-percentage prediction and calling it something that "most people wouldn't think".If you go to Las Vegas, the odds are always better that a player or team will *NOT* win something than they are that they'll win, even if the player or team is the odds-on-favorite to win. So, basically, when you say that Brady/Manning will *NOT* lead the league in FPs, you're making a very safe high-percentage prediction. It's not going out on a limb, it's firmly hugging the trunk and holding on for dear life. It's a weak prediction. Your other predictions were actually things that people might not think, but that one doesn't really qualify. Why not add a prediction that at least three of the top ten RBs during the draft won't finish the season in the top 10 while you're at it?

Dude, the whole thing was moot, to me. I explained my position as well VERY CLEARLY, so if it was my original post, then why not just allow me to do it how I choose to do it. I told him that I intentionally put that prediction out in that manner, and the guy continued to try to give me suggestions on how I should have phrased it. I don't need an adviser to tell me how to post something. It is not implied that I was making some BOLD predictions by the title of my thread, that would be someone's assumption. It's simply THINGS YOU MIGHT NOT THINK. That doesn't equate to BOLD, IMO. In this particular example, it equates to Tom Brady being picked as the consensus 1st QB in drafts and me saying I don't believe he will be the guy to finish first over the next 3-4 years. Simple, agree or disagree, it doesn't matter and it's not a problem. But if they don't like it, then don't worry about it, start a thread and make your own assertions, no need to tell others how they should state, or word stuff, in their threads.

I wasn't telling you how to phrase your opinion, I was just saying that, as currently phrased, it does not qualify as a projection that people MIGHT NOT THINK HEADING INTO 2009 (CAPS CAPS CAPS).P.S. When you post something entirely in caps, it equates to bold.

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours. I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills. People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football. DONE....Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please. Thank You!

First, Schneike's not my "buddy". Obviously we've seen each other around quite a bit since we've both around and active for a while, but I can't think of a single instance where I've directly interacted with him (i.e. quoted a post or had him quote one of mine). Given our tenures and levels of activity it's bound to have happened at some point, but I don't recall it, and I doubt he does, either. Implying that he's only on my side because we're bosom buddies and BFFs is just short-sighted. If he's on "my side" it's because he agrees with my position, not because he's fond of me.Second, I don't think it's an exaggeration of facts to call "Dude, please take something for this condition of yours." an attack, (although, for the record, I didn't take it as such).Third, I don't know how it's "petty and juvenile" to point out that a prediction you made is incredibly likely to be correct and not at all uncommon thinking. I think it's more juvenile to expect every post to be in awe at how risky your predictions are, or to assume that everyone is trying to pump you for just a taste of your super-secret knowledge that far surpasses our own. I can tell you right now that I don't care the slightest little bit about which QB you have ranked as your #1 QB in dynasty leagues. It's not like your opinion would have the slightest impact on how I rate or value QBs in my dynasty league.Fourth, when you make a thread full of predictions, then you can't later tell people they weren't involved when they offer an opinion on one of those projections. As soon as you decided to post these projections up in the public domain, everyone with access to them became "involved".

Yet again.

seconded for the second time

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I would also like to know wtf is a mogill.

 

[mdog1967]

Yet again.

seconded for the second time

Here here!!

 

[Blue-Kun]

Yet again./quote seconded for the second time/quote Here here!!

The ALL CAPS TO EMPHASIZE I'M RIGHT AND YOUR WRONG was the kicker in this exchange.

 

[kremenull]

Classic!...A bunch of cheerleaders who can't think for themselves to save their lives. "Hey, Thing 2. You know that guy Kremenull, yeah, I don like how he phrases stuff nor how he thinks he knows everything, although, whenever he posts something I have always tried to discount what he says though, but that's irrelevent." Yeah, so what do we do now, Thing 1. "You know what, let's get the rest of the gang together and all wait around for him to show up and say something and then we'll go over into this post and all jump against Kremenull, you know....Monkey See, Monkey Do."

Tooooooo Fuuuuuunnnny!

 

[kremenull]

ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

until I read this I thought I had the phrase wrong all these years.

Who are you? Must be Thing 11 or lower.....Have you ever had an original thought in here? You guys are really, really looking good by your actions here, I must say. Do you all think you're intimidating somebody, or something?

 

[Instinctive]

Classic!...A bunch of cheerleaders who can't think for themselves to save their lives. "Hey, Thing 2. You know that guy Kremenull, yeah, I don like how he phrases stuff nor how he thinks he knows everything, although, whenever he posts something I have always tried to discount what he says though, but that's irrelevent." Yeah, so what do we do now, Thing 1. "You know what, let's get the rest of the gang together and all wait around for him to show up and say something and then we'll go over into this post and all jump against Kremenull, you know....Monkey See, Monkey Do."Tooooooo Fuuuuuunnnny!

To quote a wise man: "God you're dumb."We don't know each other. Or, I don't know any of these people. I din't know your internet account existed until this thread. Why don'tyou grow a f***in brain, wake up, and smell the roses?! Nobody is out to get you. It is simply multiple people realizing on their own that what you said is simply incorrect. It is not bold (as you yourself implied it was) in any way, shape, form, or fashion to take the field against 2 guys over the next few years. And I am still waiting for a reply to my Kevin Smith debate with you? Its in the spirit of the thread, but you were probably too self absorbed to take in all the facts I posted as well as conlcusions I drew. I'm probably just out to get you. Because I spend my life living ont he internet to annoy people who incorrectly think they are being bold. Yup! You got me! Way to go!ETA.S. grow up. don't make personal attakcs or self pity, just try to go our and defend your position with a well based argument and facts and evidence to support it. Stop this "because I said so," self righteous bulls**t.

 

[Instinctive]

ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

until I read this I thought I had the phrase wrong all these years.

Who are you? Must be Thing 11 or lower.....Have you ever had an original thought in here? You guys are really, really looking good by your actions here, I must say. Do you all think you're intimidating somebody, or something?

I think it was my original thought when I pointed out your incorrect use of idiomic phrases of English. I don't think it is intimidating, i just find a small amount of humor when somebody as self righteous and (self-declared) omniscient as you says "mogill."ETA smiley

 

[-jb-]

this thread took a wrong turn somewhere.

 

[mdog1967]

ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

until I read this I thought I had the phrase wrong all these years.

Who are you? Must be Thing 11 or lower.....Have you ever had an original thought in here? You guys are really, really looking good by your actions here, I must say. Do you all think you're intimidating somebody, or something?

I think it was my original thought when I pointed out your incorrect use of idiomic phrases of English. I don't think it is intimidating, i just find a small amount of humor when somebody as self righteous and (self-declared) omniscient as you says "mogill."ETA smiley

Mogill appears to be a family name as best as I can tell, with a whole lot of folks with that last name living in the upper midwest. I personally like the phrase making a Mountain out of my Mojo, but that's just me. I like that word "Mojo" just kind of rolls off the tongue, Try saying it slow MOOOOJOOO .

 

[kremenull]

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours. I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills. People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football. DONE....Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please. Thank You!

Dude...it isn't that people don't like how you put it out there, its just that you implied it was a bold prediction when, in fact, it is not bold at all. And before you go off on me too, I'm nobody's buddy here, just a friendly neighborhood spell/fact checker. In this case, they are correct in saying it isn't a bold prediction at all. I think the point is that you shouldn't claim it as such.And I agree with it. I also agree with Pryor>Tebow. So far Pryor has barely scraped the tip of the iceberg. He's accurate, he's strong, he's fast, he has an arm cannon...Going to be a beast someday.Now on the RBs: Most of those I would agree with, but I think you're wrong on Smith, and here's why:He has been the leading rusher in the NCAA, something you don't do by being average in everything and great at nothing. IIRC, he holds the NCAA record for single season rushes, so he's quite durable. He also holds the record for straight rushes without a fumble in a season, spending that entire record year without fumbling the ball. (450 carries) So you know he can protect it well.His record season for points scored is 4th all time, so you know he finds the endzone. His single season rushing best was only 62 yards shy of Barry Sanders's record.I think his durability, high ypc, balance of power, and ability to catch out of the backfield (72% catches on 54 targets last season) could lead him to have many monster FF seasons if Detroit climbs out of the cellar of the league. Which has been done before, and owuldn't be that difficult if a couple young defense guys step up and Stafford is good.ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

Now, I'm going to be the better man here and overlook your stab at me in calling me dumb. Maybe I'm a bit overly sensitive right now, and I allowed some stuff to get under my skin which I shouldn't have, but like you said, my man, you don't know them, nor me. So chill with the names. And I'm going to ask you to delete that post.Now, on to your debate on Smith.His college production not-withstanding, I simply do not use numbers to bring in another player's name (Barry Sanders) as some sort of comparison or benchmark. Can we agree he is not a talent of Barry Sanders ilk? If not, then there is no need for further discussion from my perspective.Yes, he does have some skills, nice vision, good cutting ability, decent speed/agility. I'm not saying that he is not talented. I also believe that Addai was pretty talented. They just don't excel at anything to be able to hold off the type of talent that is looming and that invariably comes into the league. Guys like Smith, Addai, Ryan Grant, these guys have a pretty short window for producing. If all goes well (pretty much perfect), ala a Rudi Johnson, and they stay injury-free and somehow manage to put up monster numbers consistently year-after-year, then yes, he'll keep his job. I've just seen this type of running back too many times, and they just don't have a long window. Harvey Williams, Bobby Humphrey, Kevan Barlow, Neal Anderson, Chester Taylor, Dalton Hilliard, Ernest Byner, Tim Worley, Tatum Bell, Terry Allen, on-and-on.....these guys end up just names, but you know what, many had some very successful seasons.And if he's fortunate, then maybe yeah, he can have a pretty nice run like Rudi....but also recall, Rudi's team was an offensive juggernaut and an emerging team during those years. Detroit's o-line is putrid, and it looks like they might be in need of a complete overhaul. Also bear in mind, this coaching staff didn't have any input regarding the selection of Smith.

 

[SSOG]

Now, on to your debate on Smith.His college production not-withstanding, I simply do not use numbers to bring in another player's name (Barry Sanders) as some sort of comparison or benchmark. Can we agree he is not a talent of Barry Sanders ilk? If not, then there is no need for further discussion from my perspective.Yes, he does have some skills, nice vision, good cutting ability, decent speed/agility. I'm not saying that he is not talented. I also believe that Addai was pretty talented. They just don't excel at anything to be able to hold off the type of talent that is looming and that invariably comes into the league. Guys like Smith, Addai, Ryan Grant, these guys have a pretty short window for producing. If all goes well (pretty much perfect), ala a Rudi Johnson, and they stay injury-free and somehow manage to put up monster numbers consistently year-after-year, then yes, he'll keep his job. I've just seen this type of running back too many times, and they just don't have a long window. Harvey Williams, Bobby Humphrey, Kevan Barlow, Neal Anderson, Chester Taylor, Dalton Hilliard, Ernest Byner, Tim Worley, Tatum Bell, Terry Allen, on-and-on.....these guys end up just names, but you know what, many had some very successful seasons.And if he's fortunate, then maybe yeah, he can have a pretty nice run like Rudi....but also recall, Rudi's team was an offensive juggernaut and an emerging team during those years. Detroit's o-line is putrid, and it looks like they might be in need of a complete overhaul. Also bear in mind, this coaching staff didn't have any input regarding the selection of Smith.

I happen to agree that, in terms of talent level, Smith looks pretty comparable to a Rudi Johnson, Joseph Addai, Ryan Grant, Reuben Droughns type player. I think he's good enough to produce at an NFL level, but not good enough to hold off the myriad challengers that are going to get brought in to compete against him every year over a long timeline.

 

[Instinctive]

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours. I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills. People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football. DONE....Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please. Thank You!

Dude...it isn't that people don't like how you put it out there, its just that you implied it was a bold prediction when, in fact, it is not bold at all. And before you go off on me too, I'm nobody's buddy here, just a friendly neighborhood spell/fact checker. In this case, they are correct in saying it isn't a bold prediction at all. I think the point is that you shouldn't claim it as such.And I agree with it. I also agree with Pryor>Tebow. So far Pryor has barely scraped the tip of the iceberg. He's accurate, he's strong, he's fast, he has an arm cannon...Going to be a beast someday.Now on the RBs: Most of those I would agree with, but I think you're wrong on Smith, and here's why:He has been the leading rusher in the NCAA, something you don't do by being average in everything and great at nothing. IIRC, he holds the NCAA record for single season rushes, so he's quite durable. He also holds the record for straight rushes without a fumble in a season, spending that entire record year without fumbling the ball. (450 carries) So you know he can protect it well.His record season for points scored is 4th all time, so you know he finds the endzone. His single season rushing best was only 62 yards shy of Barry Sanders's record.I think his durability, high ypc, balance of power, and ability to catch out of the backfield (72% catches on 54 targets last season) could lead him to have many monster FF seasons if Detroit climbs out of the cellar of the league. Which has been done before, and owuldn't be that difficult if a couple young defense guys step up and Stafford is good.ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

Now, I'm going to be the better man here and overlook your stab at me in calling me dumb. Maybe I'm a bit overly sensitive right now, and I allowed some stuff to get under my skin which I shouldn't have, but like you said, my man, you don't know them, nor me. So chill with the names. And I'm going to ask you to delete that post.Now, on to your debate on Smith.His college production not-withstanding, I simply do not use numbers to bring in another player's name (Barry Sanders) as some sort of comparison or benchmark. Can we agree he is not a talent of Barry Sanders ilk? If not, then there is no need for further discussion from my perspective.Yes, he does have some skills, nice vision, good cutting ability, decent speed/agility. I'm not saying that he is not talented. I also believe that Addai was pretty talented. They just don't excel at anything to be able to hold off the type of talent that is looming and that invariably comes into the league. Guys like Smith, Addai, Ryan Grant, these guys have a pretty short window for producing. If all goes well (pretty much perfect), ala a Rudi Johnson, and they stay injury-free and somehow manage to put up monster numbers consistently year-after-year, then yes, he'll keep his job. I've just seen this type of running back too many times, and they just don't have a long window. Harvey Williams, Bobby Humphrey, Kevan Barlow, Neal Anderson, Chester Taylor, Dalton Hilliard, Ernest Byner, Tim Worley, Tatum Bell, Terry Allen, on-and-on.....these guys end up just names, but you know what, many had some very successful seasons.And if he's fortunate, then maybe yeah, he can have a pretty nice run like Rudi....but also recall, Rudi's team was an offensive juggernaut and an emerging team during those years. Detroit's o-line is putrid, and it looks like they might be in need of a complete overhaul. Also bear in mind, this coaching staff didn't have any input regarding the selection of Smith.

Just so you know, when you have to say "I'm going to be the better man," you aren't. Leaving it alone would be being the better man. I admit I like to make little digs, but don't pretend you're a better person because of it. It may have been a bit too much to straight up say dumb, so I'd like you to drop it now and I will forget about it as well. Let's get back to football! I didn't purposefully bring in Barry Sanders's name, he just happened ot be the guy ahea dof Smith on the single season rushing record list. I don't think you get to be that good without having some elite skill. Although it is funny that they both ended up on the Lions lol. And also maybe the fact that he has the same production as a guy like Sanders or LT2 is a sneaky predictor of possible future success. Now I doubt he's THAT good, but it also wouldn't surprise me.The point is the numbers. If anybody could do that then he wouldn't be so high on the list. And if you watch Smith, I think you can see that he has excellent lateral movement skills as well as a low cente rof gravity for good power a la MJD. If he had been the starter all season instead of sitting behind the guy who got a FA payday for the first few games, we would be talking about Smith at the end of round 1 just like we are Chris Johnson and Steve Slaton. (I will take this moment to soothe my ego and say I drafted all 3 in all my leagues last year and it worked out GREAT-ego moment over) He also has great hands out of the backfield. I think if you watch his gameplay you will notice he is very elusive without sacrificing power and combining that with a 50+ reception pace and you get a guy who could quite possibly have Brian Westbrook type seasons. If the OLine improves I would not be surprised to see LT2 type rushing numbers (who also had a bad OLine his first couple years in league).As a matter of fact, since we are in the bold prediction thread, I will go out and say:Kevin Smith will have a career much cloer to Tomlinson than Rudi Johnson. Book it.

 

[SSOG]

I didn't purposefully bring in Barry Sanders's name, he just happened ot be the guy ahea dof Smith on the single season rushing record list. I don't think you get to be that good without having some elite skill. Although it is funny that they both ended up on the Lions lol. And also maybe the fact that he has the same production as a guy like Sanders or LT2 is a sneaky predictor of possible future success. Now I doubt he's THAT good, but it also wouldn't surprise me.The point is the numbers. If anybody could do that then he wouldn't be so high on the list. And if you watch Smith, I think you can see that he has excellent lateral movement skills as well as a low cente rof gravity for good power a la MJD. If he had been the starter all season instead of sitting behind the guy who got a FA payday for the first few games, we would be talking about Smith at the end of round 1 just like we are Chris Johnson and Steve Slaton. (I will take this moment to soothe my ego and say I drafted all 3 in all my leagues last year and it worked out GREAT-ego moment over) He also has great hands out of the backfield. I think if you watch his gameplay you will notice he is very elusive without sacrificing power and combining that with a 50+ reception pace and you get a guy who could quite possibly have Brian Westbrook type seasons. If the OLine improves I would not be surprised to see LT2 type rushing numbers (who also had a bad OLine his first couple years in league).As a matter of fact, since we are in the bold prediction thread, I will go out and say:Kevin Smith will have a career much cloer to Tomlinson than Rudi Johnson. Book it.

Kevin Smith had some absurd total numbers in college, but I would argue that the only demonstrably elite skill he showed was the ability to handle an obscene workload (and yes, health and durability are both skills). 450 carries in 14 games is OBSCENE, but all it does is make him a great compiler. He averaged 5.2 yards per carry, which would look pretty good in the SEC, but not so much in CUSA.

 

[kremenull]

Look dude, no need to try to counsel me, everyone is an adult in here. So you all need to stop trying to come to your good old buddy's aid about some insignificant little thing and blow it out of proportion to now be labeled as some kind of attack. Now when SSOG and I got into a heated discussion on another issue recently, and when he actually did call me some names and attempt to belittle me and my statements, where were you then? Not that anyone needed or requested you. So the bottom line is, you do you and stick to yours.

I've never attacked anyone in here and never will, so stop exaggerating facts. I simply told him that he overanalyzes stuff and asked if he was alright (jokingly). So what if I put the looney/loco icon on there, give me a break. And for the last time, stop making mountains out of mogills.

People have their own styles of writing, and agendas, so like I said to the other guy and will state to you, and be done with it, once I told him that I put the statement out there how I wanted to put it out there...that means, end of story, no need to try and "correct" me to state things how you want me to state things. That is what is petty and juvenile. Stick to football.



DONE....

Please stop littering this thread with these erroneous replies, none of you were even involved, and keep the thread on topic please.

Thank You!

Dude...it isn't that people don't like how you put it out there, its just that you implied it was a bold prediction when, in fact, it is not bold at all. And before you go off on me too, I'm nobody's buddy here, just a friendly neighborhood spell/fact checker. In this case, they are correct in saying it isn't a bold prediction at all. I think the point is that you shouldn't claim it as such.And I agree with it. I also agree with Pryor>Tebow. So far Pryor has barely scraped the tip of the iceberg. He's accurate, he's strong, he's fast, he has an arm cannon...Going to be a beast someday.

Now on the RBs: Most of those I would agree with, but I think you're wrong on Smith, and here's why:

He has been the leading rusher in the NCAA, something you don't do by being average in everything and great at nothing. IIRC, he holds the NCAA record for single season rushes, so he's quite durable. He also holds the record for straight rushes without a fumble in a season, spending that entire record year without fumbling the ball. (450 carries) So you know he can protect it well.

His record season for points scored is 4th all time, so you know he finds the endzone.

His single season rushing best was only 62 yards shy of Barry Sanders's record.

I think his durability, high ypc, balance of power, and ability to catch out of the backfield (72% catches on 54 targets last season) could lead him to have many monster FF seasons if Detroit climbs out of the cellar of the league. Which has been done before, and owuldn't be that difficult if a couple young defense guys step up and Stafford is good.

ETA: what is a "mogill?" DO you mean "mogul?" Or "molehill?"

Now, I'm going to be the better man here and overlook your stab at me in calling me dumb. Maybe I'm a bit overly sensitive right now, and I allowed some stuff to get under my skin which I shouldn't have, but like you said, my man, you don't know them, nor me. So chill with the names. And I'm going to ask you to delete that post.Now, on to your debate on Smith.

His college production not-withstanding, I simply do not use numbers to bring in another player's name (Barry Sanders) as some sort of comparison or benchmark. Can we agree he is not a talent of Barry Sanders ilk? If not, then there is no need for further discussion from my perspective.

Yes, he does have some skills, nice vision, good cutting ability, decent speed/agility. I'm not saying that he is not talented. I also believe that Addai was pretty talented. They just don't excel at anything to be able to hold off the type of talent that is looming and that invariably comes into the league. Guys like Smith, Addai, Ryan Grant, these guys have a pretty short window for producing. If all goes well (pretty much perfect), ala a Rudi Johnson, and they stay injury-free and somehow manage to put up monster numbers consistently year-after-year, then yes, he'll keep his job. I've just seen this type of running back too many times, and they just don't have a long window. Harvey Williams, Bobby Humphrey, Kevan Barlow, Neal Anderson, Chester Taylor, Dalton Hilliard, Ernest Byner, Tim Worley, Tatum Bell, Terry Allen, on-and-on.....these guys end up just names, but you know what, many had some very successful seasons.

And if he's fortunate, then maybe yeah, he can have a pretty nice run like Rudi....but also recall, Rudi's team was an offensive juggernaut and an emerging team during those years. Detroit's o-line is putrid, and it looks like they might be in need of a complete overhaul. Also bear in mind, this coaching staff didn't have any input regarding the selection of Smith.

Just so you know, when you have to say "I'm going to be the better man," you aren't. Leaving it alone would be being the better man. I admit I like to make little digs, but don't pretend you're a better person because of it. It may have been a bit too much to straight up say dumb, so I'd like you to drop it now and I will forget about it as well. Let's get back to football! I didn't purposefully bring in Barry Sanders's name, he just happened ot be the guy ahea dof Smith on the single season rushing record list. I don't think you get to be that good without having some elite skill. Although it is funny that they both ended up on the Lions lol. And also maybe the fact that he has the same production as a guy like Sanders or LT2 is a sneaky predictor of possible future success. Now I doubt he's THAT good, but it also wouldn't surprise me.

The point is the numbers. If anybody could do that then he wouldn't be so high on the list. And if you watch Smith, I think you can see that he has excellent lateral movement skills as well as a low cente rof gravity for good power a la MJD. If he had been the starter all season instead of sitting behind the guy who got a FA payday for the first few games, we would be talking about Smith at the end of round 1 just like we are Chris Johnson and Steve Slaton. (I will take this moment to soothe my ego and say I drafted all 3 in all my leagues last year and it worked out GREAT-ego moment over)

He also has great hands out of the backfield. I think if you watch his gameplay you will notice he is very elusive without sacrificing power and combining that with a 50+ reception pace and you get a guy who could quite possibly have Brian Westbrook type seasons. If the OLine improves I would not be surprised to see LT2 type rushing numbers (who also had a bad OLine his first couple years in league).

As a matter of fact, since we are in the bold prediction thread, I will go out and say:

Kevin Smith will have a career much cloer to Tomlinson than Rudi Johnson. Book it.

WOW! Now that is something I've never heard. So then you must be drafting this guy in every draft then, right? A late 2nd to early 3rd assures you get him, and if you really believe this, then.........WOW!

 

[Instinctive]

3.01. Generally pairing him with Peterson and Westy/Barber/Jacobs/Steve Smith/Jennings/Peyton

Every mock is different, but 1.01 is always Peterson and unless 2 of Jacobs/Smith/Jennings fall, then yes he is 3.01. Usually only one of the guys I just listed has fallen to me.

Actually lately it seems i have Peterson/Barber/Smith.

These are redrafts, so I don't feel a need to have him. In dynasty though, I am trading/have traded for him. So yeah, I walk the walk if that's what you're asking.

And closer doesn't mean equivalent. It means if LT averaged 200 and Rudi averaged 150 I would be predicting smith to average greater than 175. Those are simple numbers, but I use them becaus eit makes it easier to demonstrate my point.

 

[soothsayer]

The "Chosen One" would be Terrelle Pryor. He will give beatings not take them. And dodge them as well. And throw over/around them as well. Kid will be unreal after 2 more seasons in college. Will be the best QB prospect in the last, I dunno, EVER!

I don't like Pryor...but that face can ony mean you havent seen him play. He is simply incredible.

So was Kordell Stewart coming out of college.

 

[kremenull]

The "Chosen One" would be Terrelle Pryor. He will give beatings not take them. And dodge them as well. And throw over/around them as well. Kid will be unreal after 2 more seasons in college. Will be the best QB prospect in the last, I dunno, EVER!

:X

I don't like Pryor...but that face can ony mean you havent seen him play. He is simply incredible.

So was Kordell Stewart coming out of college.

I have to keep attaching pics to the names....

 

[The Jerk]

I missed this thread the first time around, but the most interesting part to me concerned the multi-thread "athletic" QB revolutionizing the game. I believe this has been predicted about as long as soccer has been predicted as the sport of the future in the U.S., but so far the on-field results haven't met anywhere near the hype. As an entertainment phenomenon, the athletic QB certainly creates many exciting plays, upping the WOW meter and "did you see that move" comments, but all you need to do to show how overrated the importance of athletic QBs are is to look at the QBs of Super Bowl champions. Randall Cunningham was going to revolutionize the position, Kordell Stewart was going to revolutionize the position, etc. yet here in 2009 we're still looking for someone to truly revolutionize the position.

The most run-oriented QB to win a Super Bowl in my opinion is Steve Young, but he won it after he had become much more of a traditional passer than a hybrid runner/passer. At some point, odds favor an athletic QB finally being a Super Bowl champion as a starter, but that may be more because so many more teams have one than did in the past and pure statistical odds than any "revolution" at the position.

 

[lyon812]

3.01. Generally pairing him with Peterson and Westy/Barber/Jacobs/Steve Smith/Jennings/Peyton

Every mock is different, but 1.01 is always Peterson and unless 2 of Jacobs/Smith/Jennings fall, then yes he is 3.01. Usually only one of the guys I just listed has fallen to me.

Actually lately it seems i have Peterson/Barber/Smith.

These are redrafts, so I don't feel a need to have him. In dynasty though, I am trading/have traded for him. So yeah, I walk the walk if that's what you're asking.

And closer doesn't mean equivalent. It means if LT averaged 200 and Rudi averaged 150 I would be predicting smith to average greater than 175. Those are simple numbers, but I use them becaus eit makes it easier to demonstrate my point.

I agree, OP is selling Smith short here. Comparing him to Addai is disingenous. Addai has vision, instincts, and hands, but lacks a lot more. He doesn't have Smith's burst through the hole, nor does he show the same amount of power.Conversely, Smith has great quickness, vision, and strength. He's a tough runner who remains strong late. He's patient and in a great offensive system for his talents, as he lets his blockers set up and quickly hits the open holes. He's demonstrated soft hands out of the backfield and while he isn't a burner, he has a nice burst. He's a fierce competitor, plays through injuries, and is a leader.

He's also been working hard on increasing his power and maintaining his leverage on blockers.

http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2009/..._hills_evi.html

His performance last year, plus his strong efforts in the preseason, gives me no reason to think he's doomed for a short career.

 

[thekidd2009]

Interesting thread to say they least but I just can't get over the "Pryor will revolutionize the position." I also recently read on here "Percy Harvin will revolutionize the wr position." I'm new to this message board but i'd be willing to bet the same was said about Vick and Young (I bet Reggie Bush was made out to be the second coming or something)

My own take on the athletic qb is this:

1) In college, these athletic qb's rely on what comes easiest to them and that is run. They are usually the best athletes on the field and can run away from defenders with ease. This works great for them on the college level but this doesn't work so well in the nfl. The talent in the nfl is hands above anything they've seen in college (Defensive ends are running 4.5s)

2) They never truly "develop" into pocket passers. Regardless of how "talented" or athletically gifted they are, you can't just rely on what came easiest to you in college. When the defenses start calling blitzes, these guys are so used to just tucking it and running, that they never learned how to step up in the pocket and deliver the ball.

I still don't understand what people are implying when they say Pryor will revolutionize the position. I understand the guy has a ton of talent and is only 19, but I just don't see him being able to change the game. He reminds me of Vince Young in college along with a laundry list of other running qb's. I've see this act to many times and i'm definitely not buying him changing the position.

 

[SSOG]

Interesting thread to say they least but I just can't get over the "Pryor will revolutionize the position." I also recently read on here "Percy Harvin will revolutionize the wr position." I'm new to this message board but i'd be willing to bet the same was said about Vick and Young (I bet Reggie Bush was made out to be the second coming or something)My own take on the athletic qb is this:1) In college, these athletic qb's rely on what comes easiest to them and that is run. They are usually the best athletes on the field and can run away from defenders with ease. This works great for them on the college level but this doesn't work so well in the nfl. The talent in the nfl is hands above anything they've seen in college (Defensive ends are running 4.5s)2) They never truly "develop" into pocket passers. Regardless of how "talented" or athletically gifted they are, you can't just rely on what came easiest to you in college. When the defenses start calling blitzes, these guys are so used to just tucking it and running, that they never learned how to step up in the pocket and deliver the ball.I still don't understand what people are implying when they say Pryor will revolutionize the position. I understand the guy has a ton of talent and is only 19, but I just don't see him being able to change the game. He reminds me of Vince Young in college along with a laundry list of other running qb's. I've see this act to many times and i'm definitely not buying him changing the position.

My response...1) Athletic QBs don't rely on the run because it's what comes easiest to them, they rely on the run because it presents a unique schematic advantage. When the RB is carrying the ball, there are 9 other men on the field blocking for him. When the QB carries the ball, there are 10 other men on the field blocking for him. In Division 1 football, QBs are *RARELY* the best athletes on the field, they run because it makes the offense harder to defend.2) I don't think this is true at all. If a QB is going to be strictly a pocket passer, he needs to be an 8 out of 10 or better in order to be successful. If a QB is a 9 out of 10 or a 10 out of 10 as a runner, though, then he only needs to be a 4 out of 10 as a passer to succeed in college. It's not that running QBs can't develop into good passers, it's that the 4 out of 10 pocket passers never see the field in the first place. In theory, there's nothing at all stopping a QB who is a 10 out of 10 as a pocket passer and a 10 out of 10 as a runner from becoming strictly one or the other to great effect.For what it's worth, I don't think that Harvin is going to revolutionize the WR position, because he's such a unique talent (anymore than Moss "revolutionized" the WR position by making everyone draft extremely tall, extremely fast WRs with incredible hands and mind-blowing leaping abilities... because outside of Moss, none of those WRs exist). In the same way, I don't think a QB is going to revolutionize the QB position (whether it's Tebow or Pryor or Young or whoever- all of these guys are unique talents that other teams can't really copy). I *do* think that the QB position is going to be revolutionized at the pro level... but not because of anything Pryor or Tebow do. The QB position is going to be revolutionized because someday, on some team, some coach is going to bring the spread to the pros. And for those who are convinced it can't work at the professional level... the "most spread" offense of the last 15 years is also the highest scoring offense in NFL history. The 2007 Patriots basically ripped off the Florida Gators' playbook, minus the QB runs.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

4. QBs like Pat White, Mike Vick, Tim Tebow, and the "Chosen One" will quite possibly change the game as we see it today, or should I say "revolutionize" the position of QB, at least modify and/or expand the current traditional QB role over the next few years......5. Josh Morgan > Michael Crabtree.Yes, the period means period....Redraft, dynasty, whatever. Morgan will simply be a better player. Attitude, work ethic, and internal makeup will be factors here. And by all means, please stay asleep on the kid's talent......I'm not referring to draft pick #10

Kremenell, I agree with many of your points. I especially agree that like Crabtree, you can have high level talent but fail on this level like David Terrell, Koren Robinson (minus a strong year), Charles Rogers, Mike Williams because of a lack of desire and the ability to want to improve. This makes a lot of sense to me, where you are saying a slighty lesser talent can beat out a talent if their is an interest in desire.I know that you are a big fan of Pryor, but it seems to me that you are making decisions on him based on his talent, rather than his desire. One year ago, we were marveling at the talent of Crabtree, now we see more of the blush come off the rose. It seems difficult, if you are a believer in the importance of desire, to feel certainity about any player, until you see how they play after they get paid. So it makes sense to me to say "I think Pryor will be the best QB in football, if he takes care of the effort/study part of the game the way I think/he will." It makes sense to me draft him early in every dynasty draft if you believe it. It just seems a bit premature to talk label him as a "revolutionizer" of a position until we know a bit more about his make-up.

 

[kremenull]

4. QBs like Pat White, Mike Vick, Tim Tebow, and the "Chosen One" will quite possibly change the game as we see it today, or should I say "revolutionize" the position of QB, at least modify and/or expand the current traditional QB role over the next few years......5. Josh Morgan > Michael Crabtree.Yes, the period means period....Redraft, dynasty, whatever. Morgan will simply be a better player. Attitude, work ethic, and internal makeup will be factors here. And by all means, please stay asleep on the kid's talent......I'm not referring to draft pick #10

Kremenell, I agree with many of your points. I especially agree that like Crabtree, you can have high level talent but fail on this level like David Terrell, Koren Robinson (minus a strong year), Charles Rogers, Mike Williams because of a lack of desire and the ability to want to improve. This makes a lot of sense to me, where you are saying a slighty lesser talent can beat out a talent if their is an interest in desire.I know that you are a big fan of Pryor, but it seems to me that you are making decisions on him based on his talent, rather than his desire. One year ago, we were marveling at the talent of Crabtree, now we see more of the blush come off the rose. It seems difficult, if you are a believer in the importance of desire, to feel certainity about any player, until you see how they play after they get paid. So it makes sense to me to say "I think Pryor will be the best QB in football, if he takes care of the effort/study part of the game the way I think/he will." It makes sense to me draft him early in every dynasty draft if you believe it. It just seems a bit premature to talk label him as a "revolutionizer" of a position until we know a bit more about his make-up.

Very fair points indeed. You're right, I'm sold on Pryor's talent level and at this point but who knows if the kid will want to put in the work necessary to elevate his game to the elite status once he gets in the NFL. But from what I noted when watching him in his Frosh year, I sensed a kid who wants to be the best and showed the desire to lead and raise the level of his teammates' play. In watching the OSU-USC matchup last year, it seemed like the OSU kids were afraid and resigned to getting their tails kicked until Pryor came into the game and he didn't back down from the Trojans' defense and also displayed the kind of ability and presence of "belonging" on the same field as such a talented team. His teammates simply looked overwhelmed and lacking in confidence until he got in the game, as I recall. I expect this weekend's game to reveal some of the same. I won't be surprised to see Pryor's national profile take a huge step up after this weekend. But hey, we'll see. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Judge Smails]

Much, much more important for a QB to be able to read defenses, keep his eyes downfield, and be able to side step in the pocket to make accurate throws than it is to be a runner. QB's get older, bigger, slower. You can only run for so many years. Pryor is a special athlete (I was at the USC game last year) for sure, but if Michael Vick and Vince Young haven't panned out yet (nothing close to a championship) then teams will be hesitatant to go down this route again. Look at who is getting drafted. Strong arms who can throw the out pass at the NFL level and adapt to the speed of the game.

You think these guys can put more points on the board in the NFL then a Brady/Manning/Brees? I don't think so.

 

[SSOG]

Much, much more important for a QB to be able to read defenses, keep his eyes downfield, and be able to side step in the pocket to make accurate throws than it is to be a runner. QB's get older, bigger, slower. You can only run for so many years. Pryor is a special athlete (I was at the USC game last year) for sure, but if Michael Vick and Vince Young haven't panned out yet (nothing close to a championship) then teams will be hesitatant to go down this route again. Look at who is getting drafted. Strong arms who can throw the out pass at the NFL level and adapt to the speed of the game.You think these guys can put more points on the board in the NFL then a Brady/Manning/Brees? I don't think so.

More points than Manning/Brady/Brees? Probably not. More points than Orton/Pennington/Hill/Bulger/Collins/etc? I'd take that bet.

 

[Instinctive]

Yeah, remember that while we all remember Vick for his inconsistent passing, he did take ATL into the playoffs....and win at least one playoff game, IIRC

 

[Traders2001]

Here are just a few tidbits of the things that I'm predicting as the 2009 season is closely approaching. These are not casual thoughts/opinions, they are formed positions and stances that I'm willing to ride with based on what I've gathered after considerable evaluation.....1. Steve Slaton will outperform Chris Johnson over the next 3-4 years.....yes, so this does apply to dynasty. I have Slaton rated above Chris Johnson, ever so slightly, and believe that it will be close, but final production will tilt in the favor of Slaton over the next few years, beginning in '09. 2. At least 75% of these RBs will be replaced by the end of 2010 as the lead dog on their respective NFL teams. They will either bust, decline sharply, or be overtaken by better talent......Ryan Grant, Marion Barber, Joseph Addai, Derrick Ward, Clinton Portis, Willie Parker, Cedric Benson, Brian Westbrook, Pierre Thomas, Larry Johnson, LaDanian Tomlinson, and Kevin Smith3. The #1 Fantasy QB over the next 3-4 seasons will not be Tom Brady or Peyton Manning4. QBs like Pat White, Mike Vick, Tim Tebow, and the "Chosen One" will quite possibly change the game as we see it today, or should I say "revolutionize" the position of QB, at least modify and/or expand the current traditional QB role over the next few years.And last but not least, I've analyzed both players and thought about it quite long enough to go ahead and make the call ahead of the curve, 5. Josh Morgan > Michael Crabtree.Yes, the period means period....Redraft, dynasty, whatever. Morgan will simply be a better player. Attitude, work ethic, and internal makeup will be factors here. And by all means, please stay asleep on the kid's talent......I'm not referring to draft pick #10

1) Agree .. Jhonson will be a bust this year .2) Agree i would say out of the 13 RB you mentionned just Smith and maybe Benson will keep producing for years to come.3) Agree it will be Brees .4) Not even close .5) No way .

 

[kremenull]

Much, much more important for a QB to be able to read defenses, keep his eyes downfield, and be able to side step in the pocket to make accurate throws than it is to be a runner. QB's get older, bigger, slower. You can only run for so many years. Pryor is a special athlete (I was at the USC game last year) for sure, but if Michael Vick and Vince Young haven't panned out yet (nothing close to a championship) then teams will be hesitatant to go down this route again. Look at who is getting drafted. Strong arms who can throw the out pass at the NFL level and adapt to the speed of the game.You think these guys can put more points on the board in the NFL then a Brady/Manning/Brees? I don't think so.

From these comments, I'm not sure if you've really monitored Pryor's progress as a passer. While being limited from the beginning last year due to not attending Spring Practice before his freshman season, which is BIG, as Matt Barkley was able to attend this year for USC, this kid still came in and started at a major college as a true Frosh. Sure, they simplified the offense some, as expected due to his late arrival, and the kid still performed more than admirably as he led the Big 10 in passer rating. And this offseason, he has progressed very well and has improved his mechanics and throwing motion, which in my book means a lot as it points to the fact that the kid will work diligently to improve. When you're working with elite physical tools, this kid's ceiling is unlimited.....and not simply as a runner, which many have alluded to with their responses.In the progression that I'm seeing, yes, this kid will be an elite NFL QB prospect, much better than anyone who has come out since at least as far back as Peyton Manning. Now whether that turns into an elite NFL QB, is yet to be seen. But upon entering the NFL in at least a couple of years, just mark these words down, teams will be falling over themselves to try to get the Top pick, unlike most any other year in recent memory where teams have been dreading owning the 1st pick.......Also, I wouldn't bet against him in becoming an elite NFL QB someday to fulfill the promise.

 

[pantherclub]

No matter how fast or how elusive a running qb is that will always take a shot from defensive player at some point and get their clocks cleaned. Culpepers career was basically destroyed when he ran against the Panthers and got popped and his knee planted in the dirt and went the wrong way. I remember Kris Jenkins catching Vick one time solid and it looked like Vick was torn in two. My point is that all of these "running qb's" figure out at some point that the running is the absolute last resort and will get them in trouble or hurt more times than not. Look at McNabb, he was a freak at first but he took way too many hits and is a pocket QB now.

 

[JamesTheScot]

I think the QBBC is over-hyped.

Anytime you specialize in that manner, the natural thing to do is play to that player's strengths. The problem with that is that you can easily become relatively predictable. With QB's, that means certain plays or even whole sections of the playbook are taken off the table for that player. This is particularly true when you consider how many (or few) first team reps are going to be available each week in practice to divide between 2 QB's!

So you end up with a couple of guys that each only get to practice part time with the starters and only get to work on part of the playbook. And if you try and simplify their plays to increase their overall repetoire, you further lose the ability to tweak those plays from week to week to exploit your opponent's weaknesses.

Not to mention the timing issues you run into with QB's not getting enough reps with the WR's in practice or the lack of rythm from series to series in the game.

D's aren't going to have to sub personnel necessarily because down and distance are still going to dictate packages for both the O and the D pre-snap. And the D's will have an even smaller catalog of plays to defend against because of the aforementioned specialization.

I think the Wildcat is about as far as you can take this. What's working for the Wildcat right now is that it's new. D's are going to catch up.

 

[thekidd2009]

Interesting thread to say they least but I just can't get over the "Pryor will revolutionize the position." I also recently read on here "Percy Harvin will revolutionize the wr position." I'm new to this message board but i'd be willing to bet the same was said about Vick and Young (I bet Reggie Bush was made out to be the second coming or something)My own take on the athletic qb is this:1) In college, these athletic qb's rely on what comes easiest to them and that is run. They are usually the best athletes on the field and can run away from defenders with ease. This works great for them on the college level but this doesn't work so well in the nfl. The talent in the nfl is hands above anything they've seen in college (Defensive ends are running 4.5s)2) They never truly "develop" into pocket passers. Regardless of how "talented" or athletically gifted they are, you can't just rely on what came easiest to you in college. When the defenses start calling blitzes, these guys are so used to just tucking it and running, that they never learned how to step up in the pocket and deliver the ball.I still don't understand what people are implying when they say Pryor will revolutionize the position. I understand the guy has a ton of talent and is only 19, but I just don't see him being able to change the game. He reminds me of Vince Young in college along with a laundry list of other running qb's. I've see this act to many times and i'm definitely not buying him changing the position.

My response...1) Athletic QBs don't rely on the run because it's what comes easiest to them, they rely on the run because it presents a unique schematic advantage. When the RB is carrying the ball, there are 9 other men on the field blocking for him. When the QB carries the ball, there are 10 other men on the field blocking for him. In Division 1 football, QBs are *RARELY* the best athletes on the field, they run because it makes the offense harder to defend.2) I don't think this is true at all. If a QB is going to be strictly a pocket passer, he needs to be an 8 out of 10 or better in order to be successful. If a QB is a 9 out of 10 or a 10 out of 10 as a runner, though, then he only needs to be a 4 out of 10 as a passer to succeed in college. It's not that running QBs can't develop into good passers, it's that the 4 out of 10 pocket passers never see the field in the first place. In theory, there's nothing at all stopping a QB who is a 10 out of 10 as a pocket passer and a 10 out of 10 as a runner from becoming strictly one or the other to great effect.For what it's worth, I don't think that Harvin is going to revolutionize the WR position, because he's such a unique talent (anymore than Moss "revolutionized" the WR position by making everyone draft extremely tall, extremely fast WRs with incredible hands and mind-blowing leaping abilities... because outside of Moss, none of those WRs exist). In the same way, I don't think a QB is going to revolutionize the QB position (whether it's Tebow or Pryor or Young or whoever- all of these guys are unique talents that other teams can't really copy). I *do* think that the QB position is going to be revolutionized at the pro level... but not because of anything Pryor or Tebow do. The QB position is going to be revolutionized because someday, on some team, some coach is going to bring the spread to the pros. And for those who are convinced it can't work at the professional level... the "most spread" offense of the last 15 years is also the highest scoring offense in NFL history. The 2007 Patriots basically ripped off the Florida Gators' playbook, minus the QB runs.

Schematic advantage? This isn't rocket science and I think you're out smarting yourself here. Players like Juice Williams and Tyrod Talyor succeed in college solely because of there ability to run the football. Vince Young was great in college because he was a pretty good passer and a great running qb. None of these players will have success in the NFL because they never have truly been great passers. Sure a coach could draft one of these running qbs and try to develop them into better passers, but I feel like it is a very tough task to do if the qb was never a great passer in the first place. You don't have to be a freak athlete to be a great qb and obviously you know that. I understand what your trying to say but i just don't see these guys changing the position. Of course some coach with the right system could make it work but the odds are definitely against this.

 

[SSOG]

Schematic advantage? This isn't rocket science and I think you're out smarting yourself here. Players like Juice Williams and Tyrod Talyor succeed in college solely because of there ability to run the football. Vince Young was great in college because he was a pretty good passer and a great running qb. None of these players will have success in the NFL because they never have truly been great passers. Sure a coach could draft one of these running qbs and try to develop them into better passers, but I feel like it is a very tough task to do if the qb was never a great passer in the first place. You don't have to be a freak athlete to be a great qb and obviously you know that. I understand what your trying to say but i just don't see these guys changing the position. Of course some coach with the right system could make it work but the odds are definitely against this.

I'm not outsmarting myself. Tim Tebow doesn't do so well in short yardage because he's a better runner than, say, Herschel Walker or Emmitt Smith or Shaun Alexander (all three are former SEC RBs who have seen their records fall to Superman). He does so well in short yardage because he has more blockers than those guys. Running the QB is advantageous to running the RB if all other things are equal because it automatically neutralizes a potential tackler (which is a reason why the option is so popular in college, too- it's just another way of neutralizing a potential tackler and gaining a numbers advantage).Anyway, it's like I said... a guy who is an 8 runner and a 4 passer can succeed in college, and the fact that he fails in the pros doesn't mean that QBs that are 8s as runners are destined to fail... it means that QBs that are 4s as passers are destined to fail. If a QB ever came along who was an 8 runner and an 8 passer, he could be a more successful NFL QB than a guy who was a 2 runner and an 8 passer. We've seen several QBs with that kind of run/pass package, and some have even been successful in the NFL (Randall Cunningham, anyone? Steve Young? Mike Vick was actually a successful NFL QB, too). With a new wave of guys who can actually pass (Vince Young, Tim Tebow, Pat White, Terrelle Pryor, Jake Locker), I do think that an NFL team is going to get sick of stocking up on the Kyle Ortons and Kellen Clemenses of the world and will roll the dice on a spread QB. There are too many very smart NFL minds making too much noise about the spread in the NFL for it to all be a smoke screen. Hell, as I already said, the New England Patriots are already pretty much running the Florida Gators playbook and it's working just fine. What's to stop a team from drafting Tim Tebow, backing him up with Jake Locker, and implementing the rest of the playbook?

 

[theglorydays]

1) Agree

2) Agree....but not really going out on a limb pick the oldest or least talented athletically starting RBs.

3) Disagree

4) Who is the chosen one.....and wasn't Mike Vick going to do this already? No it won't change b/c those guys can't take the beating.

5) Nope.....maybe this year but not long term. Earning two WR of the Year awards in college is unreal....for a freshman and sophomore.

Wasn't looking to go out on a limb, just stating what I thinkThe "Chosen One" would be Terrelle Pryor. He will give beatings not take them. And dodge them as well. And throw over/around them as well. Kid will be unreal after 2 more seasons in college. Will be the best QB prospect in the last, I dunno, EVER!

Yeah, I know, sounds ludicrous.......right now.

LOL, you can come back after he trounces a few ####ty big ten schools and crown him, but he has a LONG way to go. A very long way.P.S thanks for the sig.

 

[thekidd2009]

Here are just a few tidbits of the things that I'm predicting as the 2009 season is closely approaching. These are not casual thoughts/opinions, they are formed positions and stances that I'm willing to ride with based on what I've gathered after considerable evaluation.....1. Steve Slaton will outperform Chris Johnson over the next 3-4 years.....yes, so this does apply to dynasty. I have Slaton rated above Chris Johnson, ever so slightly, and believe that it will be close, but final production will tilt in the favor of Slaton over the next few years, beginning in '09.

2. At least 75% of these RBs will be replaced by the end of 2010 as the lead dog on their respective NFL teams. They will either bust, decline sharply, or be overtaken by better talent......Ryan Grant, Marion Barber, Joseph Addai, Derrick Ward, Clinton Portis, Willie Parker, Cedric Benson, Brian Westbrook, Pierre Thomas, Larry Johnson, LaDanian Tomlinson, and Kevin Smith

3. The #1 Fantasy QB over the next 3-4 seasons will not be Tom Brady or Peyton Manning

4. QBs like Pat White, Mike Vick, Tim Tebow, and the "Chosen One" will quite possibly change the game as we see it today, or should I say "revolutionize" the position of QB, at least modify and/or expand the current traditional QB role over the next few years.

And last but not least, I've analyzed both players and thought about it quite long enough to go ahead and make the call ahead of the curve,

5. Josh Morgan > Michael Crabtree.

"The Chosen One" has looked spectacular thus far. It's in the third quarter and he's 1-4 for 7yards passing. The coaching staff has tremendous confidence in him throwing the football.

 

[theglorydays]

1) Agree

2) Agree....but not really going out on a limb pick the oldest or least talented athletically starting RBs.

3) Disagree

4) Who is the chosen one.....and wasn't Mike Vick going to do this already? No it won't change b/c those guys can't take the beating.

5) Nope.....maybe this year but not long term. Earning two WR of the Year awards in college is unreal....for a freshman and sophomore.

Wasn't looking to go out on a limb, just stating what I thinkThe "Chosen One" would be Terrelle Pryor. He will give beatings not take them. And dodge them as well. And throw over/around them as well. Kid will be unreal after 2 more seasons in college. Will be the best QB prospect in the last, I dunno, EVER!

Yeah, I know, sounds ludicrous.......right now.

HAHAHAHAHA, Terrell Pryor is absolute garbage and this is coming from an OSU fan...

 

[identikit]

1) Agree

2) Agree....but not really going out on a limb pick the oldest or least talented athletically starting RBs.

3) Disagree

4) Who is the chosen one.....and wasn't Mike Vick going to do this already? No it won't change b/c those guys can't take the beating.

5) Nope.....maybe this year but not long term. Earning two WR of the Year awards in college is unreal....for a freshman and sophomore.

Wasn't looking to go out on a limb, just stating what I thinkThe "Chosen One" would be Terrelle Pryor. He will give beatings not take them. And dodge them as well. And throw over/around them as well. Kid will be unreal after 2 more seasons in college. Will be the best QB prospect in the last, I dunno, EVER!

Yeah, I know, sounds ludicrous.......right now.

HAHAHAHAHA, Terrell Pryor is absolute garbage and this is coming from an OSU fan...

Well, it is non-consensus as he promised....

 

[baconisgood]

but if Michael Vick and Vince Young haven't panned out yet (nothing close to a championship) then teams will be hesitatant to go down this route again.

Vick's teams were 38-28-1 (and the year he broke his leg the Falcons were 3-1 with him and 2-10 without him) and made the playoffs twice and won a playoff game both times, and vince young was 8-5 and 9-6 his first two years and made the playoffs once. It took Peyton Manning 6 years to win a playoff game a 9 years to win a superbowl. If NFL coaches are not drafting running QBs because Young and Vick only made the playoffs 3 times in 6 full seasons as starters and only won 2 playoff games between them they should be fired. That is basically better than any active QB not named Brady.

 

[gianmarco]

Here are just a few tidbits of the things that I'm predicting as the 2009 season is closely approaching. These are not casual thoughts/opinions, they are formed positions and stances that I'm willing to ride with based on what I've gathered after considerable evaluation.....

1. Steve Slaton will outperform Chris Johnson over the next 3-4 years.....yes, so this does apply to dynasty. I have Slaton rated above Chris Johnson, ever so slightly, and believe that it will be close, but final production will tilt in the favor of Slaton over the next few years, beginning in '09.

2. At least 75% of these RBs will be replaced by the end of 2010 as the lead dog on their respective NFL teams. They will either bust, decline sharply, or be overtaken by better talent......Ryan Grant, Marion Barber, Joseph Addai, Derrick Ward, Clinton Portis, Willie Parker, Cedric Benson, Brian Westbrook, Pierre Thomas, Larry Johnson, LaDanian Tomlinson, and Kevin Smith

3. The #1 Fantasy QB over the next 3-4 seasons will not be Tom Brady or Peyton Manning

4. QBs like Pat White, Mike Vick, Tim Tebow, and the "Chosen One" will quite possibly change the game as we see it today, or should I say "revolutionize" the position of QB, at least modify and/or expand the current traditional QB role over the next few years.

And last but not least, I've analyzed both players and thought about it quite long enough to go ahead and make the call ahead of the curve,

5. Josh Morgan > Michael Crabtree.

Yes, the period means period....Redraft, dynasty, whatever. Morgan will simply be a better player. Attitude, work ethic, and internal makeup will be factors here. And by all means, please stay asleep on the kid's talent......I'm not referring to draft pick #10

Oops....